jonesmj wrote:Hi-
A 'mellophone' in Bb that is in modern valve cimbasso 'L' shape--courtesy of the Sax Museum from a c. 1881 CG Conn catalog...really fascinating...FYI..mark
As Bloke observed, it appears to be a marching baritone/euphonium body with a cylindrical valve section grafted on. So there is a significant proportion of conical tubing in that instrument. Definitely sounds like a tuba rather than any kind of trombone.
Gary Merrill
Wessex EEb tuba (Wick 3XL)
Amati oval euph (DE LN106J6Es)
Mack Brass euph (DE LN106J9)
Buescher 1924 Eb, std rcvr, Kelly 25
Schiller bass trombone (DE LB/J/J9/Lexan 110, Brass Ark MV50R)
Olds '47 Standard trombone (mod. Kelly 12c)
ghmerrill wrote:As Bloke observed, it appears to be a marching baritone/euphonium body with a cylindrical valve section grafted on. So there is a significant proportion of conical tubing in that instrument. Definitely sounds like a tuba rather than any kind of trombone.
What's the difference between
a baritone with a cylindrical valve section grafted on, and
The determination has been made that this is the type of instrument which is NOW considered a cimbasso, no matter what Verdi had in mind or in use.
The problem as I see it is that now, anyone auditioning for an opera gig has to have yet another instrument. I'm not trying to be nosy about pay, but does the Met, f'rinstance, consider cimbasso a double? How about any other company in the US? How about European companies??
bloke wrote:...It looks like one of those "marching baritone" cimbassos...
Hmm, we do not have that terminology where I am so I do not know exactly what you mean with that? But, I think it show similarities, at least the bell section and the number of valves, with both, what is said to be, the 1881 cb valve trbn
Cimbasso.jpg
and this Orsi one?
CimbassoSmall_orsi.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
John, de hjemmebyggede cimbassoer, hvor klangstykket plus de første buer er taget fra et kornetformet tenorhorn. Sam Gnagey har lavet to i F og Es, som kan ses i mit galleri.
imperialbari wrote:...Sam Gnagey har lavet to i F og Es, som kan ses i mit galleri...
Tack Klaus. Då förstår jag
Well then I do not think Steve Call's instrument looks like a home brow, especially when comparing his bell piece to those in the pics I posted earlier, which it of course could be anyway?
The buttons on his instrument also looks like what I have seen on some old Italian horns possibly Pelitti, Orsi or something else...
a baritone with a cylindrical valve section grafted on, and
a baritone?
The leadpipe?
In a totally unquantified sense, there is no difference. But that's the wrong question. The right question would be "What's the difference between a Bb baritone and a Bb baritone body/bell section with an F or Eb valve section grafted on?" Or better, in this case, "What's the difference between an F/Eb cylindrical valve section coupled to a trombone-like bell section and that same valve section coupled to a baritone bell section?" The answer is "The difference between a trombone sound and a tuba sound -- due in large part to the relative lengths of the cylindrical and conical sections."
Last edited by ghmerrill on Sat Jun 21, 2014 10:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
Gary Merrill
Wessex EEb tuba (Wick 3XL)
Amati oval euph (DE LN106J6Es)
Mack Brass euph (DE LN106J9)
Buescher 1924 Eb, std rcvr, Kelly 25
Schiller bass trombone (DE LB/J/J9/Lexan 110, Brass Ark MV50R)
Olds '47 Standard trombone (mod. Kelly 12c)
Lingon wrote:
Hmm, we do not have that terminology where I am so I do not know exactly what you mean with that? But, I think it show similarities, at least the bell section and the number of valves, with both, what is said to be, the 1881 cb valve trbn
Those pictures are at least superficially similar to the baritone/cimbasso -- but only in the rough shape of the bell section. To me, at least, even though the bell sections are wrapped in virtually identical ways, the pictures you have posted appear to show a bell section that is more cylindrical up to the point where the bell starts to flare. Or so it appears to me, though it is somewhat difficult to tell from the pictures.
True, which seems to indicate that your examples are more of the modern even more cylindrical cimbasso than mine that seems to be somewhat like the description I have seen of the older a bit more tapered cb trbn Verdi. I think I got the difference between the bariton-cimbasso and the cimbasso - cimbasso now, all more or less in the family cb valve trbns. However the Gnagey homebrevs in Klaus' gallyery seems to be even more tapered than Call's and the ones in my post?
There seems to be some similarities also when comparing the cb slide trbn in BBb and F as the BBbs also are more tapered compared with the more cylindrical F. At least when looking at the Miraphone/Jinbao and many of the modern Fs.
eupher61 wrote:
The problem as I see it is that now, anyone auditioning for an opera gig has to have yet another instrument. I'm not trying to be nosy about pay, but does the Met, f'rinstance, consider cimbasso a double? How about any other company in the US? How about European companies??
jest wonderin'
I'm comically far-removed from any sort of high-end audition circuit, but I recall (with about 95% confidence in this particular memory) that the Chicago Lyric Opera required cimbasso in their most recent audition (per their excerpts list) and was willing to grant auditioners the use of the Eb cimbasso owned by the company if they so chose. Someone closer to the situation (the winner, perhaps!) could probably give more complete and more accurate commentary about this and other similar instances.
I believe that the real point of discussion that everyone is really dancing around here is whether Verdi preferred his cimbassi in lacquer, raw brass, or silver plate.
